From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27764 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2011 10:19:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 27754 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2011 10:19:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 10:18:44 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p93AIhXD032143 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 3 Oct 2011 06:18:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p93AIfHN005677; Mon, 3 Oct 2011 06:18:42 -0400 From: Phil Muldoon To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Paul Koning , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Python: fetch value when building gdb.Value object [rediff] References: <36B29E9D-F2B3-446F-AF8A-97254A3AAEE2@comcast.net> <20111001092852.GB11227@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111001121642.GA29550@host1.jankratochvil.net> Reply-to: pmuldoon@redhat.com X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 10:19:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20111001121642.GA29550@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sat, 1 Oct 2011 14:16:42 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 Jan Kratochvil writes: > Updated for current HEAD: > > On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 11:28:52 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 21:24:45 +0200, Phil Muldoon wrote: >> What scenario will this test catch that the previous test won't? I'm >> not saying you are incorrect, I just don't understand. What >> error-trigger does the assignment to "inval" trigger? > > I would prefer here a testcase more clearly showing the bug, attached below. > > I believe the patch is right, as Phil hasn't yet agreed posting it only. It looks great, thanks for doing this. Cheers, Phil